I like the family system*, there’s interesting decisions and trade offs to be made: E.g. on potential spouses, do I go for the stats or take the general archetypes? Powerful generals can make a big difference, especially in the early game for Civs that don’t have steadfast or sniping as automatic promotions. Clearing out barb settlements is crucial to establishing a sound base which can be done with one unit and a capable general. Otherwise waiting 8 years for a city to build a unit more often than not results in tribes taking them over - and there are times that being surrounded by Numidian or Scythian tribes can kill a game right quick (worse even than a major civ.) I do wish the tribes waited a few more years before they start taking over everything, I’ve been tempted to turn them off but then since they’re a major thematic portion of the game that feels wrong.

(*But I’m also a fan of CK2 and “roleplaying in my head” where I spin little stories for different characters. I know that’s a sub-optimal and marginal play style but eh. That said I absolutely loathe the illegitimate child event that I get almost every damn game if the primary heir is female. )

I like the family system*, there’s interesting decisions and trade offs to be made: E.g. on potential spouses, do I go for the stats or take the general archetypes? Powerful generals can make a big difference, especially in the early game for Civs that don’t have steadfast or sniping as automatic promotions.

I agree with this in the early game but by turn 50 or so the family decisions just don’t seem important enough for the time to take up

Got my first barbarian alliance, and I am a bit disappointed. I had pictured a rather dangerous situation where you and the barbarians both occupied the area, and it was really, really important to stay on good terms with them, unless you kept adequate troops nearby, but that they would help defend the city from others. Now I find that once you send a settler, it is simply your city and their troops leave.

The power of barb alliances is that you can move their units to attack civs you are not at war with.

Oh… but they were moving their units on their own, generally away from my newly acquired cities. So I can move them on my turn, but they might go a different direction during their turn? Or once I move a unit, it is under my control? I don’t understand this game mechanic.

Well 50 turns was a guesstimate and I guess it depends on how close the game is. By turn 90 I usually feel confident of winning (though it typically then takes 30-40 more years) and most decisions don’t seem that important any more.

It’s hands down better than Civ V and VI. Not quite at the level of IV but considering the early access status, that is not surprising. I’m finally having fun playing a 4x again and that hasn’t happened in my case since Endless Space 2(whilst overall good, ES2 has a bad AI which hurt its longevity).

I’m finishing up the Game of the Week, locked in an extended war against a foe with better tech. For the first time, I’m really feeling the effect of tech levels. Also of family unhappiness: my units are weaker because their families are upset at me.

I’m pretty sure in my last campaign I lost a family member embedded as a general. I’d like to know if that is what happened because I’m not certain, but the pop up said they died I’m just not positive it was from the battle and not maybe old age or something. But I am paying a bit more attention to how I use them in battle as a result. Either I’ve put them on ranged where they are off front line or more mobile units. The way turns work though if you’re in the midst of a battle and your unit with the general in it gets damaged don’t be surprised if units from out of your line of sight (LOS) blitz them.

The last campaign I lost the Babylonians had like nearly a dozen chariots and so from nowhere in your LOS they could come at you and destroy any one unit at any time. And if you didn’t destroy the damaged chariots your turn, they disappeared out of LOS to heal and come back at you in a couple years.

This has made me seriously consider always having one unit at least with that extended LOS capability so I’ve got a better view of what’s coming at me.

Thanks for the answers on generals. Discord agrees with you guys: by default the general survives even if the unit they’re commanding kicks the bucket.

I agree, @easytarget, I think the extended-LOS capability is an important one. Even with it, it can be hard to see the AI coming.

I’ve enjoyed my latest war because it was the opposite of most of my Civ battles. In Civ, the AI will attack me, I’ll fend them off, then I counterattack and take cities. In this game, by contrast, I attacked the AI, I got to the gates of an enemy city, I attacked its defending unit a few times – and then the AI counterattacked in force, focus-firing my units, and I ended up retreating all the way home.

haha, pretty sure I’ve built barracks twice in some cities for this very reason. I don’t know what’s built and a little picture pops up suggesting I build them. It would help if you could better tell what’s built and for it not to suggest you build again something that’s already built (wonder if they stack?).

FinnegansFather:

see clearly where roads already exist,

Yep, it is hard to tell except where they’re built in open undeveloped tiles. Maybe make them darker?